Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Dummy Cadaques Tournament - Nothing Wrong

Author: Michael Neish

Date: 10:15:38 01/28/00

Go up one level in this thread


On January 28, 2000 at 11:49:24, Mark Taylor wrote:

>On January 27, 2000 at 22:55:51, Michael Neish wrote:
>
>Each "game" was a single random "result" - I think what you should have done is
>make each *move* a random result.  This would have evened out the anomalies by
>having a much larger no of events.

I disagree completely, since what you're suggesting is that each move is
mutually
exclusive.  Isn't one move influenced by the move that came before it?

Furthermore, if Chess games had these characteristics, then probably 99% of all
games would be draws.  Are they?

And besides, if one were to try to model it your way, how many "small errors"
need to occur so that one game can be considered won?  If Player A makes three
small errors, but then Player B makes two, is the game drawn or not?  What's
the probability of a slightly bigger error occurring?

Anyway, Chess doesn't work like this.  How many times have you seen two
programs playing, both of them show an evaluation close to zero, and
then suddenly there's a jump as one of them misses a tactical shot and the
other takes advantage of it.  After that the game is essentially over.
Sometimes the error might not be large enough for a win, and a draw
ensues.  Other times it may be, and there's a win.

How many times have you looked at annotated games and the writer
talks of "the losing move"?  With grandmasters maybe it just takes
one inaccuracy to lose the game.

Don't misinderstand me.  I'm not saying that there is only one
important move that decides the game.  I'm saying that your idea
of counting each move individually is wrong.

As I've said before, get your program to play itself over 20 or
24 games, and see what happens.

It's disturbing when one tries to reduce large-scale phenomena to
some simple model, I know.  But Chess results are rather simple in
the scheme of things and I maintain that my original assertions are
valid.

Cheers,

Mike.





This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.